Photo for your review please.

Jan 22, 2012
4,488
1,352
privatebydesign said:
Personally, 24mm TS-E 12-18" higher and shifted down, that puts the emphasis on the table, it takes up more of the frame and is more inclusive, it will also show a bit more of the scenery, after all you are selling Africa not the sky, and cut out a bit of the dead space sky. If it was shot wider than 20 I'd use the 17TS-E and do the same.

The reason I say that is because your perspective is one of inclusion, you are inviting the viewer to sit at the table, but the table space is too small to do so luxuriously, also moving up would clear a space to make the pool more prominent. If the pool edge went past the top edge of the table, as it would if you raised the camera, it would join the two halves together, as it is the pool looks like a small pool on the left and a dark mass on the right, but it is clearly a good sized pool. I would put a touch more light in the rock above the table light to give that more definition and I'd light the pool water, probably very subtly.

I don't like the cushions on the left, they look out of place and over sharpened, but I agree you need an anchoring element on that piece of grass.

As always with your critiques Sanj, I mean my comments in the most positive way.

P.S. I really don't like the starbursts from some of the lights.

Private.
Ohhhh. You are much advanced than me in photography. I have no idea how to use tilt shifts yet. Must learn!
Will crop the sky bit more.
The cushions are so intrusive! The grass at that point was eroded, the light was fading fast... excuses excuses..!!

I dislike (hate) the star bursts myself but lenses seem to produce them at small f stops. Will be careful in future. Love the learning curve of photography!

Yes of course I take all comments in a positive way generally as there is no name calling (unless of course they are from a self proclaimed grand daddy of this forum who is totally blind to progress in tech with companies besides Canon and loves to be rude).
 
Upvote 0
Jan 22, 2012
4,488
1,352
Marsu42 said:
sanj said:
How could I have done better? Thx in advance.

These starbursts are sooc and not done with a PS plugin? Interesting.

For my quick thoughts, also meant in the most constructive way: +1 for pdb's about the table/sky releationship, this is the main problem as now you're basially looking at tree outlines and a patch of sky.

But the whole composition is weired (not that you could have changed much, tough) - my view is directed to the right by the reflection on the table, but the table itself points to the left towards the sun. It feels like my eyes are crossing while trying to take in the picture.

Wow. You have a great eye for compositional elements. These did not cross my mind even once.
I would never ever add these star bursts either in post or with filters... no no no.
 
Upvote 0
Jan 22, 2012
4,488
1,352
knkedlaya said:
Image is really wonderful. Probably I would have used a flash(with blue/CTO gels) to light the stones on the right side of the frame a bit. Along with this, trying with painting the trees on the left side of the frame with a torch light/flash with gel would have opened up the trees a bit. Thats just my taste, feel free to disagree :)

Naveena

Thanks Naveena. I so agree. That would be the perfect solution. But I had no lights... But I will see what I can do in PS. Will post, please let me know if it improves the photo.
 
Upvote 0
Jan 22, 2012
4,488
1,352
TeT said:
Horizon is good because to raise it would affect how much and the angle of the trees in the photo. Changing the horizon and the trees possibly become to much trees...

However a touch of light on the immediate background might be nice, but just a touch...

Good luck duplicating that scene just to throw some light on it...

Very nice photo...

Thank you!!
 
Upvote 0
Jan 22, 2012
4,488
1,352
Sporgon said:
I want to know why you are complaining about Canon sensors whilst producing shots like that ;)

Hahahahaha. Not complaining, just wishing that I can get more details out of blacks and whites in post - something that is possible with other sensors. Canon being our choice of equipment and being the market leader should look into this pending issue to help it's loyal users. Nothing wrong with this right? :)
 
Upvote 0
sanj said:
View from back yard? That would be greatttttt. The view is of Meru National park in Kenya. I could hear distant roars of lions as I was wrapping the shoot. It was SUPER.
Wow, that sounds like a fun shoot! I bet listening to lions never gets old. I look forward to seeing what you're able to do in PS.

Marsu42 said:
+1 for knowing that Europe is not a country :->
It's not? What about European, isn't that the official language, just like the Euro is the only currency? I thought the EU made all of you into one country, just like the U.S.A, right?
;) :) :eek: :) ;)
 
Upvote 0

rpt

Mar 7, 2012
2,787
21
India
sanj said:
rpt said:
sanj said:
How could I have done better? Thx in advance.

1dc. 16-35mm F4 IS lens. F22. 1/160 shutter. ISO 160. Tripod. I blended two exposures using layer mask in PS. I also changed focus according to what I was exposing for. Please critique.
Looks nice. I prefer the horizon to be at or close to the top 1/3rd mark.

Hi Rustom.
Thanks for your suggestion. I will keep that in mind in future. I must not forget (or blindly follow) the rules!
Hope all well with you.
Thanks, I am well.

I presumed that the area of interest was the table so I cropped off the top to get the horizon at the top 1/3rd. Now the table looks big in comparison and one focuses on the table which leads you to the sunset point. Otherwise, my eyes were confused whether to look at the table or the sky - which has a beautiful colour! I did a quick and dirty edit to show you what I mean.
 

Attachments

  • Elsa-pool-2-crop_rpt.png
    Elsa-pool-2-crop_rpt.png
    388 KB · Views: 352
Upvote 0
sanj said:
For others: I failed at getting more details in the blacks - it cased noise. Three possible reasons: a) Me not doing it right, b) I perhaps underexposed it too much c) Canon sensors do not allow details in the blacks without creating ugly noise.

Nikon clearly is superior at low iso dynamic range and shadow noise quality - but in this case, you weren't doing it right. With a 14bit resolution file, you can only expect to raise the shadows so much before resolution drops to rock bottom.

That's why you bracket scenes like yours - there is no movement except for the flames, you could have easily done a 7x bracket with 2/3ev spacing and post-processed yourself silly merging 'em... this is more work, but results in superior iq for high dynamic range scenes like sunset if you want details in the shadows.
 
Upvote 0
Jan 22, 2012
4,488
1,352
Marsu42 said:
sanj said:
For others: I failed at getting more details in the blacks - it cased noise. Three possible reasons: a) Me not doing it right, b) I perhaps underexposed it too much c) Canon sensors do not allow details in the blacks without creating ugly noise.

Nikon clearly is superior at low iso dynamic range and shadow noise quality - but in this case, you weren't doing it right. With a 14bit resolution file, you can only expect to raise the shadows so much before resolution drops to rock bottom.

That's why you bracket scenes like yours - there is no movement except for the flames, you could have easily done a 7x bracket with 2/3ev spacing and post-processed yourself silly merging 'em... this is more work, but results in superior iq for high dynamic range scenes like sunset if you want details in the shadows.

Thank you for the tip. Will keep in mind. Appreciate!
 
Upvote 0